On 12/03/12 11:37 -0400, Sharoon Thomas wrote: > > On Mar 12, 2012, at 5:54 AM, Cédric Krier wrote: > > > On 11/03/12 22:30 -0400, Sharoon Thomas wrote: > >> On Mar 9, 2012, at 10:44 AM, Nicolas Évrard wrote: > >> > >>> Hello Trytonistas, > >>> > >>> Lately we have received a lot of demands for a Tryton web client. The > >>> major stopper for such a development is that it is too heavy for only > >>> one customer. > >>> > >>> The project would be to have a web client based on the proteus.js > >>> prototype with almost all the current client features adapted to the > >>> web. > >>> > >> > >> I did some work this weekend on a POC for the web client, but based on > >> ExtJS. It was mostly an experiment to try/learn the framework and I think > >> it > >> is a much better candidate for the job. > > > > Why would it be better? > > > 1. ExtJS is full fledged library with widgets (components) while jQuery > itself can only be > compared to Ext core for DOM manipulation. Now a better comparison would be > between > jQuery UI and Ext JS where Ext JS would still be a better candidate because > it has many of > the components/widgets we would require for Tryton client like Grids, Tree > panels in the > standard package itself.
We always need to customize widgets. > 2. As you can see in my current code, with just configuration we already have > a Tryton GTK > client like layout with a viewport. While this would require an original > design and styling with > jQuery (UI). Which means less code, less bugs and faster development. On the > other hand > this could be a disadvantage if what we want with the web client is a flashy > looking website > like feel. We (B2CK) don't think that a web client should be an exact copy of the current client because it will run in a browser so it should be adapted to this medium. Moreover the goal with proteus.js is to be able to embed it in any specific web development. But it is seems very complicate to do it with ExtJS. > 3. Clean data model: ExtJS has a clean data model / storage proxy > implementation which > can be/is already extended for Tryton models. I don't think so. It will always require to define Models that behaves as Tryton expect. > 4. Less cross browser issues: ExtJS I feel is the best of the JS frameworks > available which > take away the pain of cross browser look/feel/functionality issues away from > the developer. This is not objective. I think any JS framework today is cross browser. > 5. A compatible license. Its GPL too. It is an other application so any license is possible. > Also the main reason why the ExtJS community seems to use the framework is > for JS application > development like admin panels. This seems to be driving the focus of the > development as well > while jQuery itself seems to be focused on being a lightweight DOM > manipulation tool. But we already have an application. There will be less benefit to just have a copy than something able to behave differently. -- Cédric Krier B2CK SPRL Rue de Rotterdam, 4 4000 Liège Belgium Tel: +32 472 54 46 59 Email/Jabber: [email protected] Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
pgpE4jpn4gYaA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
